bmattock
Veteran
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...nted_for_questioning_news_181194.html?aff=rss
No doubt about it - digital is better if you don't like being punched in the face.
No doubt about it - digital is better if you don't like being punched in the face.
M C H
Member
Then again, my Nikon F can be a weapon in it's own right...
sirius
Well-known
Has anyone here been harassed for doing street photography (of people)? I sometimes feel a little bad when I snap photos, like I'm stealing something or invading privacy...but I like the genre so much and am so pleased when a photo does work...that I push past that feel and keep going at it.
It seems that now digital photography is so prevalent, that people are much more aware and sensitive to getting their picture taken. When I was traveling in Africa, people would come up to me and ask me to take their picture. They seemed flattered when I wanted a photo of them in general, except if they were poor and in hind-sight I can see why they would feel that way...I wouldn't want my picture taken if I was in a bad straight in life...
Anyway, maybe this has been talked about a lot here on previous forum posts, but I'm wondering what your experiences are...
It seems that now digital photography is so prevalent, that people are much more aware and sensitive to getting their picture taken. When I was traveling in Africa, people would come up to me and ask me to take their picture. They seemed flattered when I wanted a photo of them in general, except if they were poor and in hind-sight I can see why they would feel that way...I wouldn't want my picture taken if I was in a bad straight in life...
Anyway, maybe this has been talked about a lot here on previous forum posts, but I'm wondering what your experiences are...
Terao
Kiloran
Best mugshot ever, not particularly bright of the attacker. Many of my street-shooting mates regularly get hassle in London, either from rent-a-cops, real cops, or random members of the public.
Although my F, f2, and Nikkormats made formidable weapons- The Nikon E3 full-frame Digital camera outweighs the F2 with motor drive and looks like a Phaser Rifle.
bmattock
Veteran
sirius said:
Yes, from time to time.
I shot a photo of two cops in a golf cart outside at the John Wayne Airport a long time ago - back before 9/11. They came riding over and one of them asked if I had taken his photo. I said yes. He said he did not give me permission to take his photo, so I'd have to turn over my camera. I refused and said he'd have to arrest me and take it from me. We argued. I told him he was a public official and he was in public, and I'd take a photo of him if I wanted to. He finally demanded my ID, which I gave him. He checked me for warrants and let me go. I was not sure if he was going to arrest me or not, but I was sure he didn't have the authority to legally confiscate my camera for taking his photo.
Post-9/11, I'm not so sure. On airport property, he might well have the right to have me sent to Gitmo. The USA has changed.
Here is a photo I took of a parade last year. The woman put her hand in front of her baby's face and demanded that I delete the photo, which I refused. She threatened to call a cop and I said fine, call one. She followed me down the street like a deranged thing, complaining that I took her photo without her permission.
Frankly, I blanked out her child and husband's faces because I had no interest in proving my point - that I have the right to post her ugly kid's mug if I feel like it. I just wasn't going to be harassed into letting her walk away believing that she had a legal right to demand that someone not take her photo.
I have no desire to be rude to people who don't want their photo taken. These days, I'll generally delete a photo if asked. I don't respond well to demands or threats, and I usually demand to go straight to the 'or else' part of the equation. Give me the 'or else' or shut the hell up.
bmattock
Veteran
Terao said:
The funny part is that London is the most heavily-surveilled metropolitan area in the world - his photo was also being taken by various security cameras located all around the place. Why was he not beating up the police for taking his photo?
People forget that they are having their photo taken constantly in any metro area. Look up! Look up! People don't - we're trained not to - but the tops of the traffic signals and various signs are covered with cameras, and not just pointed at red-light-runners and speeders, either. Bank ATM machines are taking photos non-stop - not just of patrons who walk up. The best police photo of the OKC bombings were of the rented truck as it drove by an ATM machine that takes photos every 3 seconds, day and night.
We're being photographed constantly when we're in public - by people and agencies we don't know, for reasons we have no idea, and we get mad at lone photographers. Hmmm.
tripod
Well-known
bmattock said:
Isn't looking up at those surveillance cameras illegal yet?
M C H
Member
Nice comments, bmattock. Timothy Garton Ash recently wrote in the Guardian that Her Majesty's Government now collects more documentation on it's citizens than the STASI did on it's.
And yet its the photographers who get attacked, verbally and otherwise.
And sitemistic, I prefer to think that its "great minds," at least in your case!
And yet its the photographers who get attacked, verbally and otherwise.
And sitemistic, I prefer to think that its "great minds," at least in your case!
Peter_Jones
Well-known
M C H said:
And it seems like less than 1% of the population find this disturbing :bang:
Leighgion
Bovine Overseer
I've never had a problem, but I'm not a big-time street photographer and I live in a small place.
Also, regardless of laws about the right to photograph in public places, I personally feel it's a matter of courtesy for me to be as unnoticed as humanly possible if I'm going to take pictures of strangers.
Also, regardless of laws about the right to photograph in public places, I personally feel it's a matter of courtesy for me to be as unnoticed as humanly possible if I'm going to take pictures of strangers.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
happened to me too. They didn't try anything but called the cops. Well, sh*t happens.
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
More than likely he was not supposed to be riding around in that golf cart. A few months ago I consulted with an attorney (USA) on this subject. If you are on public property you have the right to photograph anyone or subject. If they are on public property they have no expectation of privacy and may be photographed. As far as airports and train stations go...the rules for them are different. They are not public property as is the street. They are owned an operated by in different capacity as semi public/private. You may be stopped from taking photographs and asked for identification. However, security guards can not exit a private building and stop you on the public street for taking pictures, which is a lawful act.
As far as showing identification (USA): There is no law requiring you to carry identification, i.e. you walk around your home and neighborhood with a camera with no intention of buying anything. Why would you carry identification? For a police officer to stop someone he needs to articulate a reason why that individual should be stopped and questioned. Under normal circumstances when an officer of the law stops someone he or she is obligated to articulate why he or she is detaining you for a short period of time. If they can not articulate that reason then you are free to leave. "Am I under arrest?" "Why are you detaining me?" The first question in any trial will be why was the individual stopped?
If you are assaulted you have the right and should exercise it not only for yourself but for others and call the police.
As far as showing identification (USA): There is no law requiring you to carry identification, i.e. you walk around your home and neighborhood with a camera with no intention of buying anything. Why would you carry identification? For a police officer to stop someone he needs to articulate a reason why that individual should be stopped and questioned. Under normal circumstances when an officer of the law stops someone he or she is obligated to articulate why he or she is detaining you for a short period of time. If they can not articulate that reason then you are free to leave. "Am I under arrest?" "Why are you detaining me?" The first question in any trial will be why was the individual stopped?
If you are assaulted you have the right and should exercise it not only for yourself but for others and call the police.
sirius
Well-known
M C H said:
That's a sad comparison...
FallisPhoto
Veteran
Never had a problem, even though my usual method is to shoot first and ask questions later -- and I use film 99% of the time. Then again, I don't have much interest in shooting photos of military bases, airports, telecommunications centers, railroads, undercover cops and etcetera.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
I'm so glad I have a black monopod that can double as a truncheon in times of dire need.
bmattock
Veteran
FallisPhoto said:
You'll note that he was not shooting in any of those places either.
And the usual note as well - that *you* have not had any problem does not mean that there *is no* problem. Clearly, it happened to him.
You didn't go so far as to say he was 'asking for it' but you seem to be kind of implying that. Any thoughts on that matter?
oftheherd
Veteran
Ronald_H said:
Hear, Hear! Notwithstanding how heavy your camera may be, and some of mine are too, tripods and monopods do very well thank you, and are much cheaper to replace/repair.
R
ruben
Guest
bmattock said:
This sounds so strange. What do you think motivated the woman's attitude ?
IK13
Established
Steve Bellayr said:
...yeah, but I'm afraid you might end up telling all this stuff to your cellmates later in Gitmo between the torture sessions...